mirror of
https://github.com/matze/wastebin.git
synced 2026-04-25 00:25:59 +03:00
[GH-ISSUE #26] Download "burn after reading" file #21
Labels
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
starred/wastebin-matze#21
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @molchalin on GitHub (Mar 20, 2023).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/matze/wastebin/issues/26
Problem:
Result: 404
Want: Download this file
@matze commented on GitHub (Mar 20, 2023):
Hmm, content is deleted after the first
GET, i.e. as soon as you open it. Once done, it's wiped from the database. Keeping it somewhat alive is possible but leads to an ugly architecture. How about adding a download link next to the open link?@molchalin commented on GitHub (Mar 20, 2023):
I think there are two ways to go:
I think that first approach is better. Because if you choose the second approach, you can get the same issue if you just press download button when the paste is already expired. But I don't know whether it's easy to implement
@kamaradski commented on GitHub (Jul 26, 2024):
if i would be looking to solve this problem, i would start looking into a client side clipboard function, so to take the screen contents and put it in the user clipboard. This would be fairly easy with javascript for example.
however isn't downloading the content defeating the burn-after-reading effect? I mean it's no longer burned if it is allowed to exist on your hard drive. I know it's easy to grab content off a website/screen, but maybe don't make it too easy for endusers otherwise noone will continue to use the burn-after-reading feature.
I like the way it is right now, and if you want to keep the contents you have 3 easy ways to do it:
Personally i read the OP post and think: That 404 is misleading and than go proceed to implement the following:
I think this is mostly a philosophical problem rather than a technical one.